236 A.3d 1270
Vt.2020Background:
- In early autumn 2014 Ron Preseau performed a state-mandated annual inspection of a 1994 GMC pickup owned by Douglas Newton.
- In January 2015 the truck broke down on the highway; Douglas towed it to his brother Bradley Newton’s detached garage, where Bradley had installed a vehicle lift.
- Douglas put the inoperable truck (with heavy sand in the bed) on Bradley’s lift; while Bradley was under the truck diagnosing the problem it split in two and pinned him, injuring him.
- Bradley sued Preseau and related defendants for negligent inspection, alleging the prior inspection negligently certified a severely rusted undercarriage as safe.
- The civil division granted summary judgment to Preseau, finding no legal duty to Bradley under Restatement (Second) of Torts § 324A; the Supreme Court affirmed.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Newton) | Defendant's Argument (Preseau) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 324A(a) (failure increases risk) applies | Negligent inspection affirmatively increased risk that later caused collapse | No affirmative change; inspection omission did not create greater risk than no inspection | Not applicable — plaintiff did not show a "sin of commission" or increased risk over the baseline |
| Whether § 324A(b) (undertaken duty owed by another) applies | Inspector undertook to protect third persons using highways, so duty extends to third-party injured by defect | Statutory inspection scheme targets operators and highway users; liability should not extend to off-highway, nonoperational harms | No duty — scope of any inspection-based duty does not extend to a person injured while the vehicle was not being operated on a highway |
| Whether § 324A(c) (reliance on undertaking) applies | Members of public generally rely on inspectors to identify unsafe vehicles | No specific or reasonable reliance by Douglas or Bradley on a months-old inspection for repairs in a private garage | No duty — plaintiff failed to show reliance by owner or third party regarding this incident |
| Proximate cause / causation | Negligence in inspection proximately caused the collapse and injury | Causation insufficient or too attenuated | Court did not reach proximate-cause question after concluding no duty |
Key Cases Cited
- Derosia v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 583 A.2d 881 (Vt. 1990) (Vermont adoption of Restatement (Second) § 324A).
- Sheldon v. Ruggiero, 202 A.3d 241 (Vt. 2018) (summary judgment standard; scrutiny of undertaking).
- Deveneau v. Wilt, 144 A.3d 324 (Vt. 2016) (duty analysis emphasizes relationship, risk, and public policy).
- Murphy v. Sentry Ins., 95 A.3d 985 (Vt. 2014) (plaintiff must show affirmative act that increased risk; avoid turning undertakers into insurers).
- Kuligowski v. Brattleboro Retreat, 156 A.3d 436 (Vt. 2016) (interpretation of "increased risk" under § 324A(a)).
- Stiver v. Good & Fair Carting & Moving, Inc., 878 N.E.2d 1001 (N.Y. 2007) (declining to make inspection stations insurers for post-inspection highway harms).